Reviews
Review: ‘Saint Maud’ A Sinner’s Ecstasy

Rose Glass’s directorial feature debut Saint Maud (2019) is a clever arthouse horror that deals with faith, death, and life’s purpose. The film shows us twisted realities and fantasies through the pious Maud, a mousy caretaker with a mysterious past, keeping us on the edge of our seats until the final, shocking shot. Complete with disorienting camera angles, slow yet enticing plot reveals, and intense interiority, Saint Maud is overall a wonderful trip into faith and psyche.
According to an interview with Vulture, Glass sees a direct relationship between Maud’s faith and psychosis. Such a relationship obviously spurred some harsh criticism, but the director, coming from a Catholic background herself, sees the danger in conflating the two. They are separate experiences, and while a person may descend from one into the other, “There’s always a long, complicated series of events” that leads from religion to “terrible things,” says Glass. Saint Maud takes us through that series of events.
For much of the film, Maud takes care of Amanda, a formerly illustrious dancer played by Jennifer Ehle. Maud, as we know, is fervently religious, but Amanda is an atheist. Right away, this causes friction. Maud is not content with her own observance; no, she must convert the nonbeliever as well. She soon sets out to save the sinner’s soul and consequently oversteps all rational boundaries. Amanda feigns interest at first, even gifting her caretaker a book about the painter and artist William Blake with a note saying, “My saviour.” But who is the savior? Is it Maud, the observant Christian, or Blake, who rejected all organized religion? However, as all things must end, the relationship turns sour, and Amanda reveals her true disbelief.
Depicting mental illness is, clearly and rightfully, tricky. We don’t want to villainize those who struggle, but we shouldn’t put them on the pedestal of more-than-human either. To make the situation more complex, we can add religion. Saint Maud walks the shaky line of showcasing a character with both a strong sense of faith and strong delusions. Importantly, Glass states, “It’s a lazy and quite dangerous way of thinking, to dismiss people who do terrible things as just inherently bad or mad people.” As such, there is nuance in Maud. Her faith doesn’t stem from mental illness, and her mental illness doesn’t come from her faith. They are disparate entities that happen to collide. It is intimated that Maud turned to religion when she was suffering, alone, and desperate. Just as it happens for many people, religion saved her, giving her hope and a reason to go on. What worked for her, Maud thinks, must work for others too, right? And what better way to honor G-d than to show more people the light? Of course, what Maud doesn’t consider is that not everyone wants redemption, let alone believes in it. Where do we go from there?
One of the most chilling lines is from Maud’s head, when she is alone, thinking of the trials she has undergone for her deity. The voiceover says, “If this is how you treat your most loyal subjects, I shudder to think of how you treat those who shun you.” This shows that Maud is religious not due to the promise of love, but because of the threat of punishment. She is willing to physically harm herself quite severely if those pains will grant her G-d’s favor. It is a selfish view, not actually concerned with the spiritual well-being of others. This poses the question of how much faith is based in self-preservation and how much is truly wholehearted love.
Saint Maud raises complex questions about the nature of religion without completely discounting the valid experiences of believers. I understand how some critics interpret the film, particularly the ending, as disparaging to faith, but I don’t agree with them. Blind faith, in my opinion, is not true. If we don’t question what we follow, if we don’t assess the rules for ourselves, then how do we know we are following the righteous path? Maud can be seen as a zealot, unwavering in her belief and intolerant of any and all dissenters. I can write a whole treatise on intolerance, but it’s been done before and it’s not why I’m writing this review. I’m writing to encourage you to watch a movie that will, hopefully, spur some new thoughts while providing a thrill.
Reviews
SAY YOUR PRAYERS: A Spoiler-Free Review of ‘The Nun II’
I can confidently say The Nun II is far and away from its predecessor’s flaws, even if it has a few of its own. When The Nun II has its rough spots, they can drag. But when it pulls off what it’s going for, it is fiery and fun in its execution with its own aggressive voice.

I did not go into The Nun II with high hopes. I only recently rewatched The Nun and was underwhelmed for a second time, primarily with the scares and structure. Valak’s first feature film had some redeeming qualities but didn’t feel like a necessary addition to the Conjuring universe. The demonic entity that had so much influence with so little screentime in the first two Conjuring films never really jumped out at me until the end of The Nun, and by then, it was too late.
A Marked Improvement From the Original
I can confidently say The Nun II is far and away from its predecessor’s flaws, even if it has a few of its own. When The Nun II has its rough spots, they can drag. But when it pulls off what it’s going for, it is fiery and fun in its execution with its own aggressive voice.
The Nun II, for the uninitiated (nun-initiated?), follows Sister Irene again as she hunts down her rival Valak. Thought to have been sealed away in the first film, Valak uses the body of Irene’s friend Frenchie to wreak havoc across Europe, with her final stop on the massacre tour being a boarding school in France. As Sister Irene and her apprentice, Sister Debra, try to figure out what Valak wants and where she’s going, bodies pile up around Frenchie and the children, leaving no one safe.
The opening of this film is perfectly executed in its nastiness; if you’ve been craving something as spicy as Evil Dead Rise, The Nun II has you covered, and it’s shocking how high quality it is. The Nun II is a nastier take on Sister Irene’s first journey, with some mean-spirited and enjoyable kills left in Valak’s wake. When people die in this film, they die hard, and it’s just the kind of hateful behavior you’d expect from a demon with a reputation like Valak’s.
Bonnie Aarons Returns as Valak (Pay Her Warner Bros.)
Bonnie Aarons is always a treat, and that’s no different here since she gets a lot of screen time just demolishing her victims’ bodies and minds. The practical effects used in the film are few and far between. Still, many of the digital effects on display are top-notch (barring one very bad, PS3 graphics-looking effect involving a Valak painting).
Though the absence of Damien Bachir hurts (especially their justification for why he isn’t in the film, which felt downright weak), the film’s cast still brings the heat like a packed church on Easter Sunday. Taissa Farmiga is just as enjoyable as she was the first time around playing the soft-spoken but wise Sister Irene. The script here shows you how she’s grown from the experience in the first film and gives us a better glimpse into her life before the convent, which was a welcome surprise. While it takes until the movie’s final sequence for her to really play with the explosive exorcist action the film has been teasing, she gives it her all and has me wondering what other horror franchises she could helm as the lead as I left the theatre.
Storm Reid does well as the young Sister Debra, an American novitiate having a crisis of faith and tagging along searching for a miracle. Regrettably, her character doesn’t have enough room to breathe, as she only gets a pittance of backstory and a borderline nonexistent arc. In terms of her performance, I really can’t complain since she shows her pipes with some great screaming and terrified acting. Jonas Bloquet’s return to the role as the fan favorite Frenchie actually lets him stretch his acting chops beyond comic relief, and if he doesn’t get more roles as an antagonist after this, I would be surprised; this film utilizes him perfectly and doesn’t downplay his grotesque, haunted performance for anything.
Speaking of utilizing something perfectly, everyone who sees this movie will agree that the set design is incredible. The Nun liked to bask in dark corridors and open spaces that made shots visually boring rather than spooky. The Nun II, in contrast, has these terrific, rich environments throughout the boarding school that are filled to the brim with set decoration that all falls into the right place; the rooms feel layered and full, and they actually help generate a lot of tension. The whole school becomes a series of interconnected set pieces for the big finale, shot expertly by Michael Chaves, who captures the destruction and transformation of the school with creative shots (and improved lighting from his last venture with Valak).
The score is an improvement from the first, to be sure, ditching the overly droning chorus of chants for a proper soundtrack, but don’t expect anything sonically groundbreaking or particularly new. That being said, the sound design of the rest of the film is crucial to enjoying it. The Nun II is one of those films that feels almost mandatory to watch with great speakers at home or in the theatre. Otherwise, a good chunk of the scares will fall flat, and the destructive finale will lose much of its oomph. This goes doubly for the cheaper jump scares that amount to a loud noise and a snap zoom onto Valak’s face; they’re as effective as getting whipped on your ear with a rosary in the theatre, so imagine that through cheap headphones.
The Nun II is noticeably hamstrung in its pacing thanks to its hefty hour and fifty-minute runtime, nearly half an hour longer than the first. This is primarily due to the film’s structure, which alternates between our protagonists’ and antagonists’ plots, which go back and forth quite a bit. When the two plots converge, you feel an interesting climax coming. Still, the stories being so separate means that the film’s third act needs to be stretched out and padded to oblivion so these characters can interact. You get a truly incandescent finale when Sister Irene and Valak clash, but I’d be lying if I said I didn’t start getting bored waiting for it to arrive.
BOTTOMLINE: As much as I complain about horror movies being too long, The Nun II ends up being a fun enough romp that I can mostly look past it on the first go around; your mileage may vary. I found it an enjoyable, biting sequel that ups the ante despite its pacing problems. Fans of the original will love it, and those who disliked the original should find a glimmer of hope in how the cinematography comes together for this one. As far as movies to begin the Halloween horror season go, you could do a lot worse, so watch it in theatres if you can.
Hollywood actors and writers are currently on strike against the AMPTP. This movie is not associated with any struck production. However, you can still support those affected most by the strike by donating to the Entertainment Community Fund here!
Reviews
‘Satan Wants You’ Documents the Untold Story of ‘Michelle Remembers’ and the Satanic Panic

The origin and the aftermath of the Satanic Panic is one of the most complicated and wide-reaching stories in modern-day history. In the 1980s, a collective delusion about supposed widespread ‘satanic ritual abuse’ sparked many to suddenly ‘recover memories’ about surviving satan-worshipping cults. An entire industry of occult ‘experts’ arose as the daytime talk show circuit produced panel after panel to explore the phenomena. These experts also ‘educated’ law enforcement about how to identify ‘signs’ of this abuse, leading to multiple false convictions and destroying hundreds of lives. The Satanic Panic has been the subject of many books, documentaries, and TV shows, including the beloved horror series Stranger Things (read more about that here!)
A Best-Selling Memoir That Kickstarted a Craze
The spark that caused all this mayhem is widely attributed to the best-selling memoir, Michelle Remembers, written by Dr Lawrence Padzer and his patient-turned-wife Michelle Smith. The book documents Michelle’s extensive therapy sessions in which she undergoes deep hypnosis to recover the grisly truth about the year she supposedly spent in the clutches of a satanic cult. The book is salacious, disturbing, and violent, full of details that Padzer and Smith proudly shared with the world during a cross-continent publicity tour. Many experts have questioned and debunked the book’s authenticity, but the lives of Padzer and Smith remained unexamined, until now.
In their documentary Satan Wants You, writer-directors Steve J Adams and Sean Horlor offer extensive interviews with the people who knew Smith and Padzer best, including her sister, his daughter, and his ex-wife. These interviews provide invaluable context to both of their personalities, and explain the events leading up to the book’s writing. Their perspectives on the celebrity that the couple courted feel like a big puzzle piece that no one realized was missing, and while the true story may lack the sensationalism of an omnipotent devil cult, the truth about their lives is both ordinary and tragic. During last week’s screening at Montreal’s Fantasia Film Festival, some of the film’s revelations elicited audible gasps from the rapt audience.
Adams and Horlor included excerpts from the never-before-heard therapy sessions between Smith and Padzer (who was known to record everything – the filmmakers received only 1 hour of the potentially 600 hours of therapy sessions), something that investigative journalists have been trying to obtain for decades. Alongside these revelations are an impressive montage of articles, news segments, and talk-show clips that showcase the vast influence of Michelle Remembers. On top of generously sharing her memories, Lawrence’s ex-wife provided the filmmakers with a treasure trove of newspaper clippings and taped talk show segments dating back to the 1980s. She made a point to save anything about ‘satanic abuse’ or ‘recovered memories’ that turned up in the media, and that material on its own makes this documentary a fascinating watch.
A Whole Host of Evidence Debunking the Satanic Panic
Though the film focuses on the Smith and Padzer families, Adams and Horlor provide a particular context to the satanic panic phenomena. They include interviews with investigative journalist Debbie Nathan, Blanche Barton (a leader within the Church of Satan), and several law enforcement officers who have dedicated their careers to debunking the myth of ‘satanic ritual abuse.’ The film also directly refutes many of the elements in Michelle Remembers, which are intensely satisfying moments for anyone familiar with the details in the book. They even offer evidence of the Catholic Church’s active involvement in getting the book published.
During a Q&A after the screening, hosted by Kier-La Janisse (founder of The Miskatonic Institute of Horror Studies), Adams and Horlor were very open about their process. A discussion about the intentionality of Smith and Padzer’s claims soon arose: did Michelle and Lawrence believe the stories they published? Adams and Horlor have different opinions about that, and their film allows us to see both Smith and Padzer as either fraudsters, victims, or a kind of all-too-human hybrid. Horlor added that the revelations in the documentary were fact-checked by the multiple interviews conducted off-camera, including additional family members, friends, and people involved in publishing the actual book.
An Unsettling Glimpse of the Future of Satanic Panic
The film briefly touches on the modern-day versions of the Satanic Panic (pizzagate, qanon), further emphasizing this book’s lasting effects. In a touching moment towards the end of the film, experts who’ve spent their entire lives disproving these claims express their frustration at the recent resurgence of the satanic-cult narrative. “It’s easy to blame Satan,” said Horlor during the Q&A, explaining that blaming “the devil” is often an easy scapegoat for someone’s dark, complicated life.
Satan Wants You is a wonderfully constructed documentary about a conspiracy theory that just won’t die. The film stands on its own, and if this is the first time you’ve ever heard of Michelle Remembers, you’ll walk away with a whole new perspective on how the media promotes and encourages conspiracies. However, the film’s most significant accomplishment is that it finally answers questions that should have been resolved over 40 years ago.
Don’t miss out.
Hollywood actors and writers are currently on strike against the AMPTP. This movie is not associated with any struck production. However, you can still support those affected most by the strike by donating to the Entertainment Community Fund here!